Location: The distant figure that walks the treeline. The man standing in the field.

Posts: 4,152

Quote:

Originally Posted by replican't

It's just a sh*t film.

Watch Raiders, then watch Skullf*ck. Its like the difference between sex with the woman of your dreams and a snog from your gran.

This is just pathetic. If you're gonna troll at least show some form of subtlety about it. This is on par with what a 13-year old would produce. After all this time you've been trolling this boards, it seems you would've developed a better tactic.

This is just pathetic. If you're gonna troll at least show some form of subtlety about it. This is on par with what a 13-year old would produce. After all this time you've been trolling this boards, it seems you would've developed a better tactic.

It's not trolling to call Crystalmeth a pile of poo - it's scientific fact. Just ask anyone with eyes and ears. A big bunch of you lot dont count, of course, being insane mutants who lost all perspective years ago, for the most part.

It's not trolling to call Crystalmeth a pile of poo - it's scientific fact. Just ask anyone with eyes and ears. A big bunch of you lot dont count, of course, being insane mutants who lost all perspective years ago, for the most part.

Location: The distant figure that walks the treeline. The man standing in the field.

Posts: 4,152

Quote:

Originally Posted by replican't

It's not trolling to call Crystalmeth a pile of poo - it's scientific fact. Just ask anyone with eyes and ears. A big bunch of you lot dont count, of course, being insane mutants who lost all perspective years ago, for the most part.

I couldn't care less if you hate the movie; that in itself doesn't bother me in the slightest. But, coming in here slinging vulgar words in every single post, and frankly acting like a child having a temper-tantrum is uncalled for in my opinion. Kids do come here, and this is supposed to be a family-friendly forum. Also, no one is ever gonna take you seriously as long as you act like a tike without dessert after dinner.

Kids swear all the time. It's cool and its funny and actually it gets straight to the point.

Having kids, I'm saying 'no' to that one. I raise my kids better than that.

Quote:

I bet you're American, right?

National bigotry as well? Charming.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time debating this one with you, but I'll just point out one thing. You keep going like you are, basically acting like a spoiled little jackass, and no one will want you here. If you can't be civil to the other posters, then they have no reason to be civil to you.

Well, as the title says, this is still a moderated forum. And some lines were clearly crossed in this thread. And when those flags go up, the punishment is usually swift and just.

Even if the upkeep settled for giving some cooler-time to just one participant of this recent back-and-worth, there is no need for the rest of you to stoop down on said depths as well. We're willing to look away now, as you were clearly being agitated, but in the future... if you see something you think warrants the attention of a mod, just bring in it to the attention of one.

That's all. Now, bring this discussion back on line or scatter to the four winds, basking in that gloriously good feeling of justice having happened.

To answer Scott's often repeated question: I think people are hard on "Skull" because they had overblown expectations. (It was actually better than I thought it would be!)

If I may offer a personal anecdote here, I managed to step into the theatre only knowing the title (inadvertently gleaned from here). The handful of "expectations" I had were based on the creative team's proven track record of being able to tell a story intelligently. Walking out of said theatre, however, those expectations didn't even come close to being met.

A movie is not greater than the sum of a couple of novel scenes.

This commercial succeeds @ more than the entire movie did in 120th of the time.

It is a thrilling adventure film minus the thrills or adventure. Stuff just happens for a couple of hours, you scratch your head at parts, yawn at others and laugh at the rest. Meanwhile, a bunch of obscenely rich people high five each other all the way to their offshore pension plans.

If I may offer a personal anecdote here, I managed to step into the theatre only knowing the title (inadvertently gleaned from here). The handful of "expectations" I had were based on the creative team's proven track record of being able to tell a story intelligently. Walking out of said theatre, however, those expectations didn't even come close to being met.

A movie is not greater than the sum of a couple of novel scenes.

The thing is, Sabo, you don't drone on & on & on about your aversion like some others do. Initial disappointment in 2008 is understandable but this thread's question was asked in the present tense. Taking that distinction into account, why are certain people "so hard on" Indy 4 almost 5 years later?

The disenchanted folk are "so hard on" the film while the lovers HAVE a hard-on for it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickiana

From 'Uncle' Finn to 'Ugha' Finn. Both endearing terms of course.

Heh. Combine both of your names and you get a 'Mickey Finn', the infamous knock-out drink from Indy's era. (Do the Mods have a bottle of chloral hydrate stashed behind the bar?)

KOTCS' problem is that it's a good film following three classic films. It's not a poor, average or bad film; it's just a good film in a series of greats. It's like having three Einstein-esque genius children and one who is of just average to above average intelligence.

KOTCS' problem is that it's a good film following three classic films. It's not a poor, average or bad film; it's just a good film in a series of greats. It's like having three Einstein-esque genius children and one who is of just average to above average intelligence.